Prev: Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaim and use a_ops->writepages() where possible
Next: util-linux-ng v2.18-rc1
From: Eyal Lotem on 8 Jun 2010 05:50
Replying to a very old email :-)

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Andi Kleen <andi(a)firstfloor.org> wrote:
> Eyal Lotem <eyal.lotem(a)gmail.com> writes:
>
> Replying to an old email.
>
>> � * I think it is wrong for the kernel to evict the 15 pages of the bash,
>> � � xterm, X server's working set, as an example, in order for a
>> � � misbehaving process to have 1000015 instead of 1000000 pages in its
>> � � working set. EVEN if that misbehaving process is accessing its working
>> � � set far more aggressively.
>
> One problem in practice tends to be that it's hard to realiably detect
> that a process is misbehaving. The 1000000 page process might be your
> critical database, while the 15 page process is something very
> unimportant.

Well, this solution doesn't really depend on any detection of
"misbehaving", it just goes about a more accurate way of defining page
importance. A simple solution to the problem you suggest is assigning
far more "credits" to the database than to the 15-page process.

Eyal

>
> -Andi
>
> --
> ak(a)linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaim and use a_ops->writepages() where possible
Next: util-linux-ng v2.18-rc1